Revision as of 20:26, 25 September 2022 editForza bruta (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users597 edits →Again disruption← Previous edit | Revision as of 21:31, 25 September 2022 edit undoDarrad2009 (talk | contribs)147 edits →Unreliable sources: ReplyTag: ReplyNext edit → | ||
Line 138: | Line 138: | ||
I would like to comment on a matter of unreliable sources in the article Josip Broz Tito, ]. As a matter of fact, the sources (Footnotes: 251 & 252) "Nova Srpska politička misao" (New Serbian political thought) and "svedok.rs" (witness.rs) are not reliable because they are far-right-oriented sources which contradict many historical facts and fabricate the facts that suit their way of thinking. ] (]) 16:13, 25 September 2022 (UTC) | I would like to comment on a matter of unreliable sources in the article Josip Broz Tito, ]. As a matter of fact, the sources (Footnotes: 251 & 252) "Nova Srpska politička misao" (New Serbian political thought) and "svedok.rs" (witness.rs) are not reliable because they are far-right-oriented sources which contradict many historical facts and fabricate the facts that suit their way of thinking. ] (]) 16:13, 25 September 2022 (UTC) | ||
:Can you identify which material you feel is inaccurate/contradictory in the cited sources? The sources appear to accurately quote or closely paraphrase material in Matunović's and Dinić's books, and the books exist. Or are you instead objecting to Matunović and Dinić? ] (]) 17:24, 25 September 2022 (UTC) | :Can you identify which material you feel is inaccurate/contradictory in the cited sources? The sources appear to accurately quote or closely paraphrase material in Matunović's and Dinić's books, and the books exist. Or are you instead objecting to Matunović and Dinić? ] (]) 17:24, 25 September 2022 (UTC) | ||
::Of course, Matunović's and Dinić's books exist, but there is nobody to remove them and I don't feel competent to question the reason for that. I believe that one of the reasons is that books are goods which bring money. | |||
::The main point is that the entire article is based on "hearsay" facts. Not a single statement refers to any credible source and I'll single out two of them: <br>(1) Mr Vlahović, referring to information from the War Archives in Vienna, "believes" that the real Josip Broz was indeed born in 1892 in Kumrovac, and died in April 1915. as a soldier of the 25th regiment of the 42nd home defence division of the Habsburg army. in the battle in the Carpathians. ''If he cites information from the War Archive, then he should also cite the archival material from which he got that information!'' <br> | |||
::(2) "Raif Dizdarević, Tito's longtime confidant and one of the last heads of state under the rotating presidency system of the former Yugoslavia, claimed that Tito held a copy of Josip Broz's 1915 death certificate, which was found in '''a black suitcase''' after his death." Note to the second sentence: | |||
::Dizdaravić wrote: "In his study in the White Palace, Tito kept some documents in '''a small safe deposit box'''. Among them was a copy of Broz's death certificate. It was issued by the Austro-Hungarian Ministry of the Army in 1915, and it was a list of soldiers who died or disappeared - including Broz".<br> | |||
::Common sense tells me that no one in their right mind would keep any incriminating documents in their suitcase! Why would he keep them? If he really had them he must've known that they could destroy him if they were discovered! It doesn't take much intelligence to see how reliable the source is!<br> | |||
::As far as I remember, in the BBC series "The Death of Yugoslavia" Raif Dizdarević did not mention any of the things stated in this source! Just in case, I'll try to watch it again. | |||
::Anyway, these are just two examples because every quote in the article has the same form. ] (]) 21:31, 25 September 2022 (UTC) |
Revision as of 21:31, 25 September 2022
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Josip Broz Tito article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13Auto-archiving period: 30 days |
This page is not a forum for general discussion about Josip Broz Tito. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about Josip Broz Tito at the Reference desk. |
Josip Broz Tito was a History good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake. | ||||||||||
|
This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
|
A fact from this article was featured on Misplaced Pages's Main Page in the On this day section on April 5, 2004, April 5, 2005, April 5, 2006, April 7, 2009, January 14, 2015, January 14, 2018, and January 14, 2021. |
Tito's note to Stalin
Grover Furr presents evidences against the only source on the existence of such a note . In short, Roy Medvedev write inconsistently a distorted tale in The Unknown Stalin and other books but provide no evidence supporting it. He said to have heard Aleksei Snegov partially remembering some letters in Stalin's desk, he may have read more than 20 years back.
Please correct me or correct the article. Uspec (talk) 16:43, 23 August 2021 (UTC)
- The only "correction" required is that you need a reliable source for this criticism of Medvedev. The website actualhistory.ru has nothing that indicates it is a reliable source. It actually reads like pro-Stalin propaganda, seeking to emphasise minor differences in wording to claim that the letter did not exist. If you can produce a reliable source for this questioning of the letter, we will include it in the discussion alongside and in contrast to what Medvedev says. In the meantime, I have removed the tag. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 20:51, 16 September 2021 (UTC)
"...throughout his life, Tito was poor at spelling" - citation needed!
Early life, Pre-World War I: "As a result of his limited schooling, throughout his life, Tito was poor at spelling". CITATION NEEDED!
- Good grief, the citation after that material covers that material. Not every sentence has to have a separate citation.
WHERE does it say that throughout his life Tito was poor at spelling, in that citation? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.103.54.2 (talk) 17:17, 6 October 2021 (UTC)
I wait an answer. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.103.54.2 (talk) 21:05, 6 October 2021 (UTC)
- Why don’t you read the pages of the book? Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 22:35, 6 October 2021 (UTC)
YOU have read it? I am not an editor on Misplaced Pages, YOU are. YOU have read it or not?! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.103.54.2 (talk) 15:52, 7 October 2021 (UTC)
- Yes, I’ve read it, it is mentioned on page 5, and I added it to the article. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 22:36, 7 October 2021 (UTC)
And if an English historian wrote it, should we believe him? I've looked it up, I found he knows Russian, but does he know Croatian? And even better than a Croat (Tito)? Did he studied Tito's letters in detail and come to the conclusion that he was not writing correctly? Or how? Even Misplaced Pages mentions how the American "experts" from the NSA made fools of themselves by concluding that Tito didn't speak Croatian like a Croat, but like a Polish or a Russian, only to find out later that it was the very dialect spoken in Tito's native region. It is simply not plausible that a man who spoke Croatian, the other languages of the Yugoslav republics, German, Hungarian, Russian, Czech and a little Polish, would not spell his own native tongue correctly. It's not credible. And it is not clear how this English historian came to such a conclusion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.103.54.2 (talk) 16:34, 8 October 2021 (UTC)
- We need reliable sources for what goes in articles. This has a reliable source. Unless you have a contrasting reliable source, this discussion is over from my perspective. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 22:40, 8 October 2021 (UTC)
"We need reliable sources for what goes in articles." My point exactly!
- Please read WP:RS. If you think Emeritus Professor Geoffrey Swain or his publisher I.B. Tauris are not reliable, then post at WP:RSN and get a community opinion. If you accept they are reliable then WP:DROPTHESTICK. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 23:57, 8 October 2021 (UTC)
- I'll add that what Swain says is "Tito’s schooling was meagre, attending school for just four years; those who worked closely with him noted in later life that he could never spell correctly." Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 00:16, 9 October 2021 (UTC)
The vision of the Emeritus Professor Geoffrey Swain is a simplistic one. Three aspects need to be considered:
1) Tito came from a mixed family (Croatian father, Slovenian mother);
2) Different languages spoken in the same region, even before the formation of Yugoslavia as a state;
3) The foreign languages that Tito spoke.
In this article: https://www.bbc.com/serbian/cyr/balkan-52798109, the historian Markovic summarizes the situation (far too complex for an English historian) like that:
"As for the weaker knowledge of the Serbo-Croatian language, Markovic reminds that, formally speaking, Tito's mother tongue was Slovenian.
After all, the language spoken in Kumrovec during his childhood was not literary Croatian. And later, his languages got mixed up, which still happens often to guest workers today". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.103.54.2 (talk) 03:04, 9 October 2021 (UTC)
At this point we have a reliable published source (Swain) versus speculation by an IP editor. It doesn't seem like much of a contest. Doremo (talk) 03:11, 9 October 2021 (UTC)
You got it all wrong. At this point, we have an English source (Swain) versus a Serbian historian (Markovic), who know better the realities of the land.
- Quite right Doremo. IP, you are wasting your (and my) time here. You haven't read Swain, yet you think you know better than he does. In the preceding sentences he points out that at age eight, Tito's Slovene was better than his Croatian. I don't know what your problem is with this, and frankly I don't care. As you appear uninterested in engaging with Misplaced Pages's policies on reliable sources, this is the last I will be commenting on this thread. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 03:17, 9 October 2021 (UTC)
Predrag J. Markovic, doctor in historical sciences from the Belgrade Institute of Contemporary History.
"As a result of his limited schooling, throughout his life Tito was poor at spelling" is one thing. "Tito's Slovene was better than his Croatian" it's quite another. Don't make him look more uneducated than he really was.
Again disruption
Again disruption versus three sources restored by me and already discused in past. The source regarding Churchill's opinion about Josip Broz was in lead of article during last six years an I simple moved it at appropriate position: where meeting Churchill-Broz has citation. Other two sources are from an encyclopedia and from Broz Tito's biography by Jasper Ridley, who is important historian and he has article in wikipedia. To remove reliable sources inserted by me is blatant disruption against[REDACTED] rules. Forza bruta (talk) 05:46, 17 September 2022 (UTC)
- I’ll respond to this later today. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 00:19, 18 September 2022 (UTC)
Ok, let's get into this:
- Firstly, the "great Balkan tentacle" quote is not placed in time (ie Sebestyen doesn't say when Churchill said this, was it before 12 August 1944 or after that date?) At the end of the war, Churchill referred to Tito in this way when ordering the British commander in Italy to seize Trieste, "this Muscovite tentacle, of which Tito is the crook." This is quoted in Churchill's Road to Victory, 1941-1945. But that was well after this. By including this quote here, you are clearly trying to add undue weight to Churchill's supposed negative view of Tito at the point that he met Tito. Churchill obviously dealt with all sorts of people he didn't always speak well of. The quote isn't supported by the Vladimir Petrović source from Annales, so by placing the quote where you did, you have incorrectly attributed the quote to him as well as Sebestyen. Perhaps because his book is so broad, Sebestyen himself gets facts wrong, as he says on the same page that 30,000 Slovene Home Guard and Ustasha troops were being held by the British as prisoners of war in Austria. This is contradicted by Tomasevich (2001, p. 774) who states that they were not accepted by the British as prisoners of war. This isn't some minor factoid, this is critical to whether their return to Yugoslavia was lawful or not under the laws of war. An error of this nature is concerning. Regardless, even if he is accepted as reliable on this matter, he does not say when Churchill made this statement about Tito, so it cannot be used in the way you have used it (to set the scene for the 12 August 1944 meeting).
- Secondly, infoplease is a tertiary source, and its use is subject to the tertiary source fallacy because it is an "argument to authority". WP uses secondary sources for a reason. It is also logically flawed. For example, a planned economy and nationalisation of industry do not necessarily mean that Tito was leading in a dictatorial manner, which is what your edit says.
- Finally, in general Ridley is fine and the quote is accurate, I have used him in this article myself for pre-WWII biographical information. The words you have used appear on page 462 of the English version published in 1994 by Constable. But you have been very selective in the quote (again clearly in a bid to add undue negative weight). Ridley goes on to say the constitution "granted all the citizens of Yugoslavia the fundamental freedoms of speech and the press, and exemption from arbitrary arrest and imprisonment...".
So, taken together, your edits a) incorrectly attribute material to a source that does not support the material, b) attempt to add undue negative weight in two areas, and c) involve the use of a tertiary source which has obvious logical flaws. Happy to discuss any of the above, but bring policy, not your opinion. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 19:19, 19 September 2022 (UTC)
Three sources.
- 1 Regarding first source, you are confusing and contradictory in your hypothetical logic but I propose to move this source in section "Evaluation".
- 2 Regarding second source, I don't understand what you want by me because I reported content of source and you can collaborate with me changing words.
- 3 Regarding third source, you can add words about Yugoslav constitution which was imitation of Soviet Union's constitution.
Furthermore user Vipz removed two reliable sources in Italia Brigade (Yugoslavia) without intervention in related talk because his favourite sport is disruption against sources, which affirm crimes made by dictator Broz Tito: I propose to move that sources from "Brigade" to here in article of "Broz Tito", who ordered foibe massacres.
If you consider my proposals and you want collaborate with me, we can find an agreement, but if you want only sources of propaganda without sources which affirm crimes made by dictator Broz Tito, I will request a mediator starting a dispute.--Forza bruta (talk) 17:57, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
Please read what I have written. I'm not interested in you giving me permission to add things. That isn't how this works. You need to explain, using Misplaced Pages policy, why this material is appropriate to be added to the article. ie why you have incorrectly attributed the quote to Petrović, why Sebestyen is reliable on this issue, why inclusion doesn't give it undue weight, why you put the quote where you did, and how you would word it if it was moved to an Evaluation section. Also why we would use a tertiary source that clearly contains important errors of fact. Also what additional words you would consider might be included to place Ridley's quote in context. If you don't want to explain the above, I don't do mediation, so you will need to use an RfC. I suggest you read the guidance on writing a neutrally worded RfC, as I think you might struggle with that given your clearly negative views about Tito. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 11:08, 24 September 2022 (UTC)
Probably we can find an agreement but considering single source by single source. I propose to put in first sentence of section "Evaluation" these words: Historians criticize his dictatorship as bloody and brutal, comparing him to the brutality of Stalin,
This is only first step.--Forza bruta (talk) 13:14, 24 September 2022 (UTC)
- Historians? You mean one historian, Sebestyen. This will need in-text attribution, and will need to be balanced with the views of other historians. We will need to look at what the wider academic sources say about Tito in this respect and formulate words that reflect the academic consensus as well as any significant varying points of view. We certainly aren't going to add what you have suggested as a representative summary of Tito in reliable secondary sources. For example, how many historians compare his brutality to Stalin? How many criticise his rule as brutal and bloody? During what period)s) of his rule? Etc. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 03:59, 25 September 2022 (UTC)
- Many historians but I can not put twelwe names and surnames with related sources in first sentence of section "Evaluation". Four historians are sufficient in that position: they are Sebestyen, Rummel, Pirjevec and McGoldrick, who now is present in first sentence of focussed section. Source is this: Joze Pirjevec, Italian edition 2015 "Tito e i suoi compagni", Einaudi editore, Torino; chapter "La vittoria", section "Anno 1945: il massacro" page 204 The merciless showdown against the "counter-revolutionaries" which cost the lives of an unknown number of people, between seventy and one hundred thousand, was long a taboo in Yugoslavia and found no echo in the West. Instead, merciless showdown was praised by Stalin, an event that made Josip Broz's collaborators proud. During a meeting with a Polish delegation, the "owner" of the Kremlin criticized the Warsaw authorities for their laxity versus the opposition forces, citing Tito as an example: he is a smart boy because he has eliminated all his opponents. Other source of Rummel is this http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/SOD.CHAP9.HTM and source of Sloven government according to important Sloven historians https://web.archive.org/web/20111004145243/http://www.mp.gov.si/fileadmin/mp.gov.si/pageuploads/2005/PDF/publikacije/Crimes_committed_by_Totalitarian_Regimes.pdf "Crimes Committed by Totalitarian Regimes". Slovenian Presidency of the Council of the European Union. Retrieved 26 December 2019. p. 156. Source is this Most of the mass killings were carried out from May to July 1945; among the victims were mostly the “returned” (or “home-captured”) Home guards and prisoners from other Yugoslav provinces. In the following months, up to January 1946 when the Constitution of the Federative People’s Republic of Yugoslavia was passed and OZNA had to hand the camps over to the organs of the Ministry of the Interior, those killings were followed by mass killing of Germans, Italians and Slovenes suspected of collaborationism and anti-communism. Individual secret killings were carried out at later dates as well. The decision to “annihilate” opponents must had been adopted in the closest circles of Yugoslav state leadership, and the order was certainly issued by the Supreme Commander of the Yugoslav Army Josip Broz - Tito, although it is not known when or in what form.--Forza bruta (talk) 19:42, 25 September 2022 (UTC)
Unreliable sources
I would like to comment on a matter of unreliable sources in the article Josip Broz Tito, Language and identity dispute. As a matter of fact, the sources (Footnotes: 251 & 252) "Nova Srpska politička misao" (New Serbian political thought) and "svedok.rs" (witness.rs) are not reliable because they are far-right-oriented sources which contradict many historical facts and fabricate the facts that suit their way of thinking. Darrad2009 (talk) 16:13, 25 September 2022 (UTC)
- Can you identify which material you feel is inaccurate/contradictory in the cited sources? The sources appear to accurately quote or closely paraphrase material in Matunović's and Dinić's books, and the books exist. Or are you instead objecting to Matunović and Dinić? Doremo (talk) 17:24, 25 September 2022 (UTC)
- Of course, Matunović's and Dinić's books exist, but there is nobody to remove them and I don't feel competent to question the reason for that. I believe that one of the reasons is that books are goods which bring money.
- The main point is that the entire article is based on "hearsay" facts. Not a single statement refers to any credible source and I'll single out two of them:
(1) Mr Vlahović, referring to information from the War Archives in Vienna, "believes" that the real Josip Broz was indeed born in 1892 in Kumrovac, and died in April 1915. as a soldier of the 25th regiment of the 42nd home defence division of the Habsburg army. in the battle in the Carpathians. If he cites information from the War Archive, then he should also cite the archival material from which he got that information! - (2) "Raif Dizdarević, Tito's longtime confidant and one of the last heads of state under the rotating presidency system of the former Yugoslavia, claimed that Tito held a copy of Josip Broz's 1915 death certificate, which was found in a black suitcase after his death." Note to the second sentence:
- Dizdaravić wrote: "In his study in the White Palace, Tito kept some documents in a small safe deposit box. Among them was a copy of Broz's death certificate. It was issued by the Austro-Hungarian Ministry of the Army in 1915, and it was a list of soldiers who died or disappeared - including Broz".
- Common sense tells me that no one in their right mind would keep any incriminating documents in their suitcase! Why would he keep them? If he really had them he must've known that they could destroy him if they were discovered! It doesn't take much intelligence to see how reliable the source is!
- As far as I remember, in the BBC series "The Death of Yugoslavia" Raif Dizdarević did not mention any of the things stated in this source! Just in case, I'll try to watch it again.
- Anyway, these are just two examples because every quote in the article has the same form. Darrad2009 (talk) 21:31, 25 September 2022 (UTC)
- Sebestyen, Victor (2014). 1946: The Making of the Modern World. Macmillan. p. 148. ISBN 978-0230758001.
"Tito was as brutal as his one-time mentor Stalin, with whom he was later to fall out but with whom he shared a taste for bloody revenge against enemies, real or imagined. Churchill called Tito 'the great Balkan tentacle' but that did not prevent him making a similar deal as the one he had made with the Soviets."
- Former good article nominees
- All unassessed articles
- B-Class biography articles
- B-Class biography (military) articles
- Mid-importance biography (military) articles
- Military biography work group articles
- WikiProject Biography articles
- B-Class socialism articles
- Top-importance socialism articles
- WikiProject Socialism articles
- B-Class Yugoslavia articles
- Top-importance Yugoslavia articles
- WikiProject Yugoslavia articles
- C-Class Croatia articles
- High-importance Croatia articles
- All WikiProject Croatia pages
- B-Class Serbia articles
- High-importance Serbia articles
- B-Class Belgrade articles
- Unknown-importance Belgrade articles
- WikiProject Serbia/Belgrade articles
- WikiProject Serbia articles
- B-Class Slovenia articles
- Mid-importance Slovenia articles
- All WikiProject Slovenia pages
- B-Class Cold War articles
- Top-importance Cold War articles
- Cold War task force articles
- C-Class military history articles
- C-Class biography (military) articles
- C-Class Balkan military history articles
- Balkan military history task force articles
- C-Class European military history articles
- European military history task force articles
- C-Class World War I articles
- World War I task force articles
- C-Class World War II articles
- World War II task force articles
- C-Class Cold War articles
- Selected anniversaries (April 2004)
- Selected anniversaries (April 2005)
- Selected anniversaries (April 2006)
- Selected anniversaries (April 2009)
- Selected anniversaries (January 2015)
- Selected anniversaries (January 2018)
- Selected anniversaries (January 2021)